How do you determine how long a can of food will last? Actually, it's kind of hard to guess, but here are a few guidelines when trying to determine the shelf life of your canned foods:

Home-canned foods Most sources say that home-canned foods will store safely for at least one year.

With other food items, the level of acid in the food is the critical element for determining how long it may store. Low-acid foods last longer on your shelves than foods with higher amounts of acid. Some sources say all commercially canned food should last at least two years. Here are some more specific recommendations:

Low-acidic foods Surprising to some, canned meats can last the longest. Most sources say they will keep for 2 to 5 years. Some sources say they will last even longer. I found a shocking story about a can of meat that was 118 years old. It was opened, analyzed, and found to still have most of the nutrients. It was still good after more than 100 years! You may not choose to eat canned meats that are this old, but likely yours will last more than the recommended five years. Other low-acid foods are soups without tomatoes, carrots, potatoes, pumpkin, and peas.

High-acidic foods For best quality, use high-acidic foods within one year or so. Foods in this category are tomatoes, fruit, and foods with a lot of vinegar in them. Still, many of these canned foods will still be edible after years worth of storage, even if they are not at the peak of quality and nutrition.

So what does it mean when we learn that something will last "at least two years?" How long will it last after the two years is over? Again, this depends on who you ask. Some people will say that you should discard the cans at this point, but most will tell you that canned foods can last for a lot longer, even years and years longer. You'll just have to use your own discretion and inspect your cans carefully before eating the food inside. Read the next article in the canned food series, "Canned Food Storage Safety" to know what to look for when inspecting cans for safety.

===============================

The dates stamped on the can are the packing date.

I take it you are speaking about canned food from the store, and NOT home canned goods.

The number of years your food is good for will vary dramatically. What types of food are you talking about? What conditions have the food been stored in? Hot and humid or dry, dark and cool?

I have a very large pantry. We have about two years worth of food storage. We are working toward seven years worth of food storage.

Modern canned foods are very safe. Examine any old cans...any dents, rust, or bulging? Discard them.

If the can is in pristine condition (no dents, rust, or bulging), you should be able to safely eat the food for at least 10 years.

Foods that are very salty ( most condescend soups), items that have a lot of sugar (peaches in heavy syrup, or jelly), or items that are very acidic and stored in glass (pickles), may be good for 20 years or more, as long as they have not been exposed to light in the case of items in glass.

There are certain items which will never go bad. Salt, sugar, and honey will never go bad. You could store them for thousands of years, and use them safely. In the case of honey and sugar, insects might get into them, but they will never actually go rancid.

The food items that I am cautious with are canned meats, canned fish, and canned items containing meat. Those are items I do not store beyond 10 years.

===============================

Canned food is pretty safe from bacterial action. but there can be exceptions of fx production temperatures were not correct. That is usually what causes 'bulging' cans.

Canned food is not necessarily safe from chemical reactions. The metals used in the can may react with the food and contaminate it. If the can is sealed with a solder containing lead the lead could diffuse into the food and that is not healthy. cans older than about 20 years were made with metals only and should not be trusted. Modern cans are usually made with an inner polymer lining to avoid such contamination, but even there production errors can give rips or holes in the lining so metal and food can get at each other.

And finally cans can corrode from the outside until holes appear through which bacteria and whatever can get at the food.

Heat and moisture accelerate corrosion and chemical reactions so storage in a cool dry place improve the odds of the can staying good.

You can be lucky and have a can that is still eatable after hundreds of years, but you can also be unlucky and get a can that has gone bad after a few years. maybe even before the expiration date.

So it is not true that cans 'never really go bad'. At least not without a lot of caveats: perfect production, cool dry storage, non acidic food, etc.

"Modern Americans are so exposed, peered at, inquired about, and spiedupon as to be increasingly without privacy -members of a naked societyand denizens of a goldfish bowl." - Edward V. Long, former United States Senator from Missouri, 1908-1972

The Florida Senate Committee on Governmental Oversight andAccountability on Wednesday approved an amendment to include"electronic authentication," as well as "biometrics" to FloridaDriver's licenses. In addition, the amendment to SB 1150, whichpassed committee on a 12-0 vote, instructs the Department of HighwaySafety and Motor Vehicles to provide a security token that can beelectronically authenticated through a personal computer.

This new amendment lays the groundwork for radio frequencyidentification (RFID) chips to be implanted into drivers' licenses.

In much the same way that merchandise in a warehouse includes RFIDtags to track items through the distribution process, RFID tags ondrivers' licenses would give authorities an additional tool to trackanyone carrying a drivers' license within the reception range of anRFID reader.

The Real ID Act of 2005, implemented in Florida on January 1, 2010,has integrated the more expansive personal data set collected bydrivers' license issuing agencies in the participating states into anational database.

In Florida, this database already includes biometrics in the form ofcomputer facial recognition data, collected at the time one's DHSMVphoto is taken. Sheriffs' departments in at least 22 Florida countiestap into the database as part of their facial recognition system, orFRnet, and feed real-time images from video cameras to instantlyidentify anyone whose face is in these cameras' field of view.

This FRnet database, which is accessible to federal, state, and evenlocal municipal agencies, also contains highly personal information,including scans of birth certificates, social security cards, marriagelicenses, and other documents.

Also in the amendment is a provision for the DHSMV to provide a"security token that can be electronically authenticated through apersonal computer." It is unclear from the amendment whether thedriver's license itself would act as the token or a key fob/USB devicewould be issued.

The Obama Administration has recently pushed for the assignment of asingle, unique authentication key for Internet users, which many arecalling the "Internet driver's license." Commerce Secretary GaryLocke and White House Cybersecurity czar Howard Schmidt met withcomputer industry leaders in January seeking input on how this newsystem would work. Locke confirmed that they in the process ofdrafting a "National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace"and said that the Internet ID would likely come in the form of a"smart card."

The stated goal of the Obama Administration strategy is to provideonline consumers an easy way to securely access Internet retailers orfinancial services without having to remember multiple passwords,while reducing online fraud.

Schmidt brushed off the obvious government surveillance potential ofthis new technology by saying, "Let's be clear: We're not talkingabout a national ID card."

But effectively, the Real ID Act has turned the individual states'drivers' licenses into a national ID card. Should this amendment toSB 1150 become law and be implemented, it would give federal, stateand local government agencies the ability to easily and stealthilytrack all Floridians without warrant, in violation of the FourthAmendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Schmidt also used a similar claim to one used during the nationalhealth care debate, which was that participation would be voluntary.In Florida, that may mean that one would have to opt out of getting adriver's license to avoid the additional governmental trackingsystems.

The Real ID Act already specifies that beginning in 2013, Americansmust have a Real ID compliant driver's license or identification cardin order to access government services or buildings. This includesthe ability to pass through a TSA checkpoint at the airport or enter afederal courthouse.

Massive spike in domestic spy operations, over 12,000 "special ops"personnel deployed daily, 100s of thousands of secret surveillancerequests rubber stamped by crooked judges, secret illegal spyoperations conducted in over 75 countries and over $11 billion spentannually to cover it all up. And this is only the tip of the icebergthat the feds were willing to declassify through various Freedom ofInformation Requests. Much more still remains classified in theinterest of National Security.

A series of previously classified documents obtained by The Federationof American Scientists Project on Government Secrecy reveals that spyoperation against U.S citizens here in the homeland have spikedmassively over the last year and so has the government's cost to coverup their plethora of illegal activities.

But first a little background to explain how America has arrived tothis point in the first place.

The Executive Branch of the US Government has found a loophole in thelegal system that has effectively abolished the Constitution byallowing our entire bill of rights to be suspended at will. Thisprobably best explains it:

The 2004 Supreme Court decision in the case of Yasir Hamdi has beentouted by many, including the ACLU, human rights organizations, andthe mainstream press, as a victory for civil rights, the Constitution,and the rule of law. It is nothing of the sort. While the Hamdimajority paid lip service to limits on the executive in time of warand to "due process," it joined Bush as a willing accomplice in hiscurrent attempt to murder the Bill of Rights.

Apologists for the Court point out that Bush did not get all that hewanted. That is true. Bush wanted absolute and plenary power todesignate anyone, citizen or not, an "enemy combatant" and do as hepleased with them detaining, interrogating, even torturing andexecuting them if he saw fit with no judicial interference at all.

Instead, the Court insisted that there be some manner of a deferentialadministrative hearing before Bush got to do as he wished. That isthe only difference of any substance. Rather than insisting thatHamdi, a U.S. citizen, receive all of the protections of the accusedwhich are his due under the Bill of Rights, the Court breathed newlife and legitimacy into this destructive doctrine that had lainaround unused and nearly forgotten, like a dusty, but still dangerous"loaded weapon," since the World War II Ex Parte Quirin decision(1942). The Hamdi Court, citing Quirin, stated unequivocally that"[t]here is no bar to this Nation's holding one of its own citizens asan enemy combatant." According to the majority on the Court, the merelabeling of a person as an "enemy combatant" removes the shield of theBill of Rights and replaces it with a new judge-created system ofminimal administrative process to "challenge" that designation. Underthis system, the accused will have none of the procedural protectionsof our Bill of Rights: No Grand Jury indictment; no trial by jury withits requirement of a unanimous verdict of twelve of one's peers; nopossibility of an unreviewable acquittal and immunity from furtherprosecution; and no protection against compelled self incrimination.The presumption of innocence is gone, as is the requirement of ashowing of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead, the governmentwill enjoy a presumption that its allegations are accurate. Theaccused will have the burden of proving his innocence, but will haveno right to compulsory process of witnesses and no right to confrontthe secret evidence and witnesses against him.

At most, according to the Hamdi majority, "a citizen held in theUnited States as an enemy combatant [will] be given a meaningfulopportunity to contest the factual basis for that detention before aneutral decision maker" and access to counsel to assist (as best theycan) in that hearing. The Court made clear that the definition of "ameaningful opportunity" will have to be fleshed out by subsequentcourts, and a military tribunal may qualify as a "neutral decisionmaker" for that minimal, administrative hearing to determine status.And this is touted as a victory.

How did we get here? As war is the greatest engine of tyranny knownto man, it should come as no surprise that like many such usurpationsbefore it, this doctrine of absolute power was born in the fires ofwar. Source: Dirt Rhodes Scholar

The United States government has effectively undermined the veryfoundation of our nation's democratic roots and has destroyed therepublic and all that for which it stands. Simply by alleging you area terrorist, treasonous or a threat to national security without anydue process of law whatsoever you immediately no longer have anyconstitutional rights or protections granted thereunder. Effectivelyour government has become an evil chameleon acting under the facade ofa freedom-loving democratic nation and protector of human rights onlyto shape-shift into a ruthless totalitarian dictatorship at will.

Several articles from the Federation of American Scientists (FAS)Project on Government Secrecy reveals some stunning revelations abouthow out of control America's espionage network has become throughinformation learned from a series of documents obtained throughFreedom of Information Act requests.

The information reveals that the US Government has been approved forhundreds of thousands of surveillance requests by categoricallylabeling hundreds of thousands of US Citizens as suspected"terrorists", i.e. enemy combatants. As we have seen over the yearsthe Department of Homeland Security is amassing a massive database ofall kinds of "threats to National Security" from you local activistsprotesting against fracking that pollutes drinking water of millionsof people to those attending anti-nuclear rallies.

The method really is ingenious. In essence the United States hasdeclared war against its very own citizens and all civil andconstitutional rights are immediately abolished.

The reports reveal the massive spike in domestic spying of alleged"suspected terrorists" has increased massively under the Obamaadministration and comes along with a bill of over $11 billion dollarsto cover up their illegal activities, I mean classify them.

The massive increase in secrecy spending is also coupled with new thatover 12,000 "special ops" are deployed in various covert operations ona daily basis to over 75 countries around the world.

Highlights: * Courts rubber stamped 1,579 applications for foreignintelligence purposes, along with 96 applications for access tobusiness records and a whopping 24,287 "national security letter"requests to spy on 14,212 different U.S. persons.

* While Obama has stumped on the campaign trail with repeated promisesof "transparency" a sharp rise in national security secrecy under hiswatch was matched by a sharp increase in the financial costs of theclassification system, causing classification-related costs to awhopping $11.42 which was a new record high.

* The US Special Operations Command (SOCOM) has grown steadily by 3 to5% every year since 9/11 bring the total number of special forcespersonal to over 60,000 with a total annual cost of $9.8 billion for2011 and a requested budget of $10.5 billion for 2012.

* It was reported that on any given day last year in excess of 12,000Special Operations Forces are deployed in action in more than 75countries across the globe.

Domestic Intelligence Surveillance Grew in 2010 FAS reports that theFeds have increased domestic spy operations in every available arenathat they were required to report on. It should be noted that thesefigures do not include numbers for the various methods of spying on UScitizens the Government implements for which they need not receivepermission, such as warrant-less wiretapping, GPS tracking and ofcourse the various CIA and NSA spy operations which are considered "amatter of national security.

FAS first reports on applications granted through the ForeignIntelligence Surveillance Court.

They then also highlight espionage applications which granted accessto spy on business records.

In 2010, the government made 96 applications for access to businessrecords (and "tangible things") for foreign intelligence purposes, upfrom 21 applications in 2009.

And finally touch base on the astounding level of "national securitylevel" requests granted to the FBI.

In 2010, the FBI made 24,287 "national security letter" requests forinformation pertaining to 14,212 different U.S. persons, asubstantial increase from the 2009 level of 14,788 NSL requestsconcerning 6,114 U.S. persons. (In 2008, the number of NSL requestswas 24,744, pertaining to 7,225 persons.)

Finally they note that there is no indication that the FederalGovernments oversight spying on U.S citizens has grown the amount ofspying that is being done.

A copy of the latest report to Congress, dated April 29, was releasedunder the Freedom of Information Act.

A recent report from the Congressional Research Service addressed"Amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Set toExpire May 27, 2011?. FISA Amendments in the USA Patriot Actwere discussed at a House Judiciary Committee hearing on"Reauthorization of the Patriot Act" on March 9, 2011, the recordof which has just been published. Related issues were discussed inanother House Judiciary Committee hearing on "Permanent Provisions ofthe Patriot Act" (pdf) on March 30, 2011.

Annual Secrecy Costs Now Exceed $10 Billion Next the FAS newsletterreveals the Federal governments tab to censor and cover up all oftheir illegal activities to maintain "national security" has grownover 15% since last year reach a staggering $11.42 billion for all"classification-related" expenses. They also reveal that overclassification is one of the many contributing factors to thestaggering increase in cost.

Ironically the costs for "classification" related expenses" did notinclude the costs for did not disclose security cost estimates for thelarge intelligence agencies the Office of the Director of NationalIntelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the National SecurityAgency, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, and the NationalReconnaissance Office because those costs are considered classified.

When pressed on why the costs of classification for the other agenciescould be revealed the government responded because that is classifiedinformation. However, as FAS revealed the information is classifiedbecause somebody said it's classified, not because it coulddemonstrably or even plausibly damage national security.

The rise in national security secrecy in the first year of the ObamaAdministration was matched by a sharp increase in the financial costsof the classification system, according to a new report to thePresident.

The estimated costs of the national security classification systemgrew by 15% last year to reach $10.17 billion, according to theInformation Security Oversight Office (ISOO). It was the first timethat annual secrecy costs in government were reported to exceed $10billion.

An additional $1.25 billion was incurred within industry to protectclassified information, for a grand total of $11.42 inclassification-related costs, also a new record high.

Many factors contribute to the rise in secrecy costs, but one of themis widespread overclassification. Ironically, the new ISOO reportprovides a vivid illustration of the overclassification problem.

Secrecy News asked two security officials to articulate the damage tonational security that could result from release of the security costestimates for the intelligence agencies, but they were unable to doso. They said only that the classification of this information wasconsistent with intelligence community guidance. But this is acircular claim, not an explanation.

Special Operations Forces on the Rise Finally the FAS newslettertouches base on the sharp increase in US special forces operations,nothing that special forces and the CIA worked hand in hand thereported assassination of Osama bin Laden.

Yes, "reported" is there words as well as mine. FAS reports thenumber of special operations personal has steadily risen 3-5% over thelast several years. Over 12,000 Special Ops personnel are deployed tovarious missions on a daily basis with a budget that has increasedfrom $2.1 billion in 2001 to $9.8 billion for the 2011 fiscal year anda request for $10.5 billion for the 2012 fiscal year.

U.S. Special Operations Forces continue to experience rapid post-9/11growth, with swelling ranks, rising budgets and a new set of missions.Special operations forces were reportedly involved along with CIApersonnel in the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan on May 1.

"Special operations" are defined (pdf) as military operations that are"conducted in hostile, denied, or politically sensitive environmentsto achieve military, diplomatic, informational, and/or economicobjectives employing military capabilities for which there is no broadconventional force requirement. These operations often requirecovert, clandestine, or low visibility capabilities . Specialoperations differ from conventional operations in degree of physicaland political risk, operational techniques, mode of employment,independence from friendly support, and dependence on detailedoperational intelligence and indigenous assets."

New doctrine published last month for Special Operations lists 11"core activities" versus 9 in the previous edition (2003), reflectingthe addition of "security force assistance" aiding the developmentof foreign security forces and counterinsurgency. See "SpecialOperations," Joint Publication 3-05, April 18, 2011.In addition to itscore tasks, US SOCOM is also assigned by law (10 USC 167j) to perform"such other activities as may be specified by the President or theSecretary of Defense." This is an open-ended category that isanalogous to the statutory language used to authorize CIA covertactions, and it can be used to underwrite an almost unlimited varietyof clandestine missions. But while there is a well-defined mechanismfor congressional oversight of covert action, no similar process forcongressional notification and review appears to exist for clandestineSOF missions.

A U.S. SOCOM Factbook, dated November 2010, is available here.

Traditionally all male, Special Operations Forces are recognizing newroles for women, Adm. Olson said. "Our attached female CulturalSupport Teams (CSTs) allow us to reach key elements of the populationin some environments which was not previously possible. This conceptof attaching females to SOF units is effective and long overdue; weare urging the Services to recognize the capabilities of CSTs asessential military skills." Curiously, Adm. Olson cited the Officeof Strategic Services, the CIA precursor organization, as an exemplarof innovation for SOCOM to follow, suggesting that more contemporarymodels were hard to find. "Our efforts to become more innovativeinclude studying the best practices of other organizations. Forexample, we are inspired by the ability of the World War II's Officeof Strategic Services to rapidly recruit specialized talent, developand acquire new technologies and conduct effective global operationswithin the period of its relatively brief existence."

Other referenced documents in the Special Ops report which were intext clipped removed from the excerpt

* 2011 SOCOM posture statement

* Budget Requests From The U.S. Central Command, U.S. SpecialOperations Command, And U.S. Transportation

* COMMAND

* U.S. Special Operations Forces: Background and Issues for Congress

Why Does Any Of This Matter To Me?

So you just mind your own business, do the daily rat race, come homesit on the couch and watch the tube. Rinse, later and repeat. Youhave nothing to worry about right?

Wrong! Let us not forget history, lest we be bound to repeat the samemistakes.

Nazi Germany:

First they came for the communists,and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.Then they came for the trade unionists,and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.Then they came for the Jews,and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.Then they came for meand there was no one left to speak out for me.

And they will come for you. In fact they already are.

Silence is the Death of Liberty

Posted by George Washington's Blog

First they tortured a U.S. citizen and gang member I remainedsilent; I wasn't a criminal Then they tortured a U.S. citizen, whistleblower and navy veteran I remained silent; I wasn't a whistleblower Then they locked up an attorney for representing accused criminals I remained silent; I wasn't a defense attorney Then they arrested a young father walking with his son simply because he told Dick Cheney that he disagreed with his policies I remained silent; I've never talked to an important politician Then they said an entertainer should be killed because she questioned 9/11 I remained silent; I wasn't an entertainer Then they arrested people for demanding that Congress hold the President to the Constitution I did not speak out; I've never protested in Washington Then they arrested a man for holding a sign I did not speak out; I've never held that kind of sign Then they broke a minister's leg because he wanted tospeak at a public event I remained silent; I wasn't a religious leader Then they shot a student with a taser gun and arrested him forasking a question of a politician at a public event I remained silent; I wasn't a student They they decided that they could assassinate U.S. citizens without trial I said nothing; I assumed I wasn't on any hit list When they came for me, Everyone was silent;there was no one left to speak out.

Inspired by the poem First They Came by Martin Niemoller, which waswritten about the Nazis.

Did you know that the US government classified over 16 milliondocuments as top secret in 2010 alone? That's 16,000,000 documents!

Something is rotten in Denmark, or rather in the USA!

WikiLeaks Exposes Secrecy Abuse

Ronald Goldfarb, writing in The Hill, points out that 90 percent ofthe 16 million classified documents generated each year should be openin the first place. "The burden," he writes, "ought to be on thoseclassifying confidentially to make the clear case for secrecy, and thepresumption should be for openness."

Ronald Goldfarb in The Hill:

Presently, over 4,000 federal government officials have the powerinitially to classify documents. The classification system costs us$7 billion a year to classify 17,000 documents a day, 16 million peryear. In addition, over 3 million employees have the power to declarea derivative classification if they use, excerpt or paraphrase aclassified document they do so 5,000 instances a day, 50 milliondocuments a year. The natural tendency is to err on the side ofsafety and overdo it. Categories of classification are subjective,and different classifiers draw different conclusions. With no sunsetprovision to undo these classifications, and an uncertain, slow andexpensive FOIA system, documents tend to stay classified.

The Wiki experience shows how silly some of the secrecy has beenshielding idiosyncratic behavior of eccentric officials, and howenlightening some of the disclosures have been our wasting money bygiving it to corrupt officials in Afghanistan.

The planned deletion of the DNA profiles of millions of innocentpeople still lacks a definitive timetable, it was revealed today.Conservative MP Philip Davies asked the government how much time wouldbe required once the legislation has been passed to remove the DNA ofpeople who have been found innocent but whose records remain on thedatabase. Home Office minister James Brokenshire said:

"Our aim is to remove the vast majority of non-convicted people fromthe NDNAD (National DNA Database) as soon as is practicable, followingenactment of the relevant provisions."

The minister had previously announced that over 6 million DNA profileshave now been entered onto the database since it was created,including more than 1 million people who do not have "a currentconviction, caution, formal warning or reprimand".

Whereas previously DNA could be kept indefinitely by the police, evenif someone had been arrested but not charged or convicted, theProtection of Freedoms Bill 2011 sets out new legislation. Thosearrested for minor crimes will have their DNA removed if they are notconvicted, however anyone arrested for a serious crime will have theirrecord kept for three years as a precaution.

Certain elements of the police have attempted to use the deletion ofDNA from the database as a means to scare the public via reports inthe media about rapists and murderers going free as a result.Genewatch UK dismissed the police figures claiming an additional 1,000crimes may occur every year as false, determining the real number tobe closer to 12 low-level crimes.

Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, challenged the plans of thegovernment:

"They are going too far in restricting the use of DNA from suspectswho have been arrested. Of course there must be safeguards in thesystem, but sensible use of DNA also helps catch very dangerouscriminals and prevents innocent people being wrongly charged too."

Davis alleges criminal misuse of CCTV cameras by government and police- AP

David Davis has alleged that the Home Office and Metropolitan Policemay have broken the law while using security camera images. The claimwas made during Home Office questions in the House of Commons.

He described an event around 12 months ago when he was tipped off thatthe Whitehall department along with the Met had misused CCTV andAutomatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras in an illegalmanner.

The Conservative MP for Haltemprice and Howden said:

"A year ago I was approached by a whistleblower with an allegationthere had been criminal misuse of CCTV and ANPR information by theHome Office and a part of the Metropolitan Police."

"I established that the individual knew the insides of theorganisations concerned an ongoing operation, that he had no obviousreason for malice or deceit, and I sent the information to the HomeSecretary."

However, Mr. Davis claimed he never received a response when hedelivered the allegations to Home Secretary Theresa May. Mrs. Mayassured him that she would investigate the allegations thoroughly, shesaid:

Conservative economists, commentators, and politicians are blasting adraft Obama administration plan that envisions using Big Brother-liketracking devices on private cars to tax drivers on how many miles theytravel.

The new tax scheme, designed to help fund transportation spending,would determine your mileage by installing electronic equipment onyour car. This would involve monitoring your location and how faryou've traveled.

Fox host Lou Dobbs offered this reaction to the trial balloon on hisradio show Thursday: "We've got an effective unemployment rate ofnearly 17 percent in this country, and these idiots want to tax carmileage. It's nuts, what they want to do," he said.

Cato economist Chris Edwards tells Newsmax that the proposal, which heconsiders "a terrible idea," is part of the reauthorization of U.S.transportation programs that is expected to occur sometime in the next12 months.

"There is a high degree of risk that there's going to be all kinds ofbig government, intrusive stuff in this bill," he warns.

The administration, stung by rising gas prices and an 8-month high injobless claims Thursday, is backing away from the draft proposalThursday.

White House spokesperson Jennifer Psaki called the proposed tax "anearly working draft proposal that was never formally circulated withinthe administration."

The 498-page draft of the administration's TransportationOpportunities Act was obtained and published by Transportation Weekly.

Psaki told TheHill.com that the draft plan "does not take into accountthe advice of the president's senior advisers, economic team orCabinet officials, and does not represent the views of the president."

There has been growing momentum in recent months to find a new way tofinance transportation spending.

In March, the Congressional Budget Office offered support for taxingdrivers based on how many miles they travel. Payment, it suggested,could be collected automatically at service stations.

The draft of the transportation proposal, which reportedly has beencirculated within the Department of Transportation and the Office ofManagement and Budget, would create a $300 million office within theFederal Highway Administration to be called the "SurfaceTransportation Revenue Alternatives Office."

The office would be tasked with defining "the functionality of amileage based user fee system and other systems," according to thedraft.

One Republican quick to criticize the mileage tax on Thursday: FormerGOP Sen. George Allen.

Allen, who is campaigning to represent the Old Dominion in the U.S.Senate, released a statement that: "In our struggling economy, theworst thing Washington can do is raise taxes on middle-class familiesand small businesses. Yet that is exactly what the latest schemebeing floated by Washington Democrats calls for."

Concerned that increasingly fuel-efficient vehicles will reducerevenue from current gasoline taxes, state officials in Oregon, Iowa,Nevada, and Texas already are considering tax proposals based onmileage driven.

In Minnesota, the state department of transportation is conducting aresearch project that would use smart phones with a GPS application tomonitor mileage. Critics point out, however, that taxing driversbased on miles driven rather than gallons consumed would decreasetheir incentive to purchase more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Quite apart from the economic issues are the privacy concerns. Allenlabeled the tax an "onerous, big brother proposal."

Edwards, the editor of DownsizingGovernment.org, tells Newsmax:"There's clearly a potential for privacy abuses with such a system,government tracking American citizens driving around in their cars.These government data bases have often been hacked and leaked. Sothere's a big privacy concern here."

Don't Buy A House In 2011 Before You Read These 20 Wacky StatisticsAbout The U.S. Real Estate Crisis - The Economic Collapse

Unless you have been asleep or hiding under a rock for the past fiveyears, you already know that we are experiencing the worst real estatecrisis that the U.S. has ever seen. Home prices in the United Stateshave fallen 33 percent from the peak of the housing bubble, which ismore than they fell during the Great Depression. Those that decidedto buy a house in 2005 or 2006 are really hurting right now. Justthink about it. Could you imagine paying off a $400,000 mortgage on ahome that is now only worth $250,000? Millions of Americans are nowliving through that kind of financial hell. Sadly, most analystsexpect U.S. home prices to go down even further.

Despite the "best efforts" of those running our economy, unemployment is still rampant. The number of middle class jobs continues to decline year after year, but it takes at least a middle class income to buy a decent home.

In addition, financial institutions have really tightened up lendingstandards and have made it much more difficult to get home loans.

Back during the wild days of the housing bubble, the family cat couldget a zero-down mortgage, but today the pendulum has swung very far inthe other direction and now it is really, really tough to get a homeloan. Meanwhile, the number of foreclosures and distressed propertiescontinues to soar. So with a ton of homes on the market and not a lotof buyers the power is firmly in the hands of those looking to buy ahouse.

So will home prices continue to go down? Possibly. But they won't godown forever. At some point the inflation that is already affectingmany other segments of the economy will affect home prices as well.

That doesn't mean that it will be middle class American families thatwill be buying up all the homes. An increasing percentage of homesare being purchased by investors or by foreigners. There are a lot ofreally beautiful homes in the United States, and wealthy people fromall over the globe love to buy a house in America.

But because of the factors mentioned above, it is quite possible thatU.S. home prices could go down another 10 or 20 percent, especiallyif the economy gets worse.

So what is the right time to buy a house?

Nobody really knows for sure.

Mortgage rates are near record lows right now and there are some greatdeals to be had in many areas of the country. But that does not meanthat you won't be able to get the same home for even less 6 months ora year from now.

In any event, this truly has been a really trying time for the U.S.housing market. Hordes of builders, construction workers,contractors, real estate agents and mortgage professionals have beenput out of work by this downturn. The housing industry is one of thecore pillars of the economy, and so a recovery in home sales isdesperately needed.

The following are 20 really wacky statistics about the U.S. realestate crisis....

#1 According to Zillow, 28.4 percent of all single-family homes with amortgage in the United States are now underwater.

#2 Zillow has also announced that the average price of a home in theU.S. is about 8 percent lower than it was a year ago and that itcontinues to fall about 1 percent a month.

#3 U.S. home prices have now fallen a whopping 33% from where theywere at during the peak of the housing bubble.

#4 During the first quarter of 2011, home values declined at thefastest rate since late 2008.

#5 According to Zillow, more than 55 percent of all single-familyhomes with a mortgage in Atlanta have negative equity and more than 68percent of all single-family homes with a mortgage in Phoenix havenegative equity.

#6 U.S. home values have fallen an astounding 6.3 trillion dollarssince the housing crisis first began.

#7 In February, U.S. housing starts experienced their largest declinein 27 years.

#8 New home sales in the United States are now down 80% from the peakin July 2005.

#9 Historically, the percentage of residential mortgages inforeclosure in the United States has tended to hover between 1 and 1.5percent. Today, it is up around 4.5 percent.

#10 According to RealtyTrac, foreclosure filings in the United Statesare projected to increase by another 20 percent in 2011.

#11 It is estimated that 25% of all mortgages in Miami-Dade County are"in serious distress and headed for either foreclosure or short sale".

#12 Two years ago, the average U.S. homeowner that was beingforeclosed upon had not made a mortgage payment in 11 months. Today,the average U.S. homeowner that is being foreclosed upon has not madea mortgage payment in 17 months.

#13 Sales of foreclosed homes now represent an all-time record 23.7%of the market.

#14 4.5 million home loans are now either in some stage of foreclosureor are at least 90 days delinquent.

#15 According to the Mortgage Bankers Association, at least 8 millionAmericans are currently at least one month behind on their mortgagepayments.

#16 In September 2008, 33 percent of Americans knew someone who hadbeen foreclosed upon or who was facing the threat of foreclosure.Today that number has risen to 48 percent.

#17 During the first quarter of 2011, less new homes were sold in theU.S. than in any three month period ever recorded.

#18 According to a recent census report, 13% of all homes in theUnited States are currently sitting empty.

#19 In 1996, 89 percent of Americans believed that it was better toown a home than to rent one. Today that number has fallen to 63percent.

#20 According to Zillow, the United States has been in a "housingrecession" for 57 straight months without an end in sight.

So should we be confident that the folks in charge are doingeverything that they can to turn all of this around?

Sadly, the truth is that our "authorities" really do not know whatthey are doing. The following is what Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke hadto say about the housing market back in 2006....

"Housing markets are cooling a bit. Our expectation is that thedecline in activity or the slowing in activity will be moderate, thathouse prices will probably continue to rise."

Since that time U.S. housing prices have experienced their biggestdecline ever.

At some point widespread inflation is going to reverse the trend weare experiencing right now, but that doesn't mean that most Americanfamilies will be able to afford to buy homes when that happens.

As I have written about previously, the middle class in America isshrinking. The number of Americans on food stamps has increased by 18million over the past four years and today 47 million Americans (a newall-time record) are living in poverty.

Millions of our jobs are being shipped overseas, the cost of livingkeeps going up and an increasing percentage of American families arelosing faith in the economy.

More Americans than ever are talking about "the coming economiccollapse" as if it is a foregone conclusion. Our federal governmentis swamped with debt, our state and local governments are swamped withdebt and our economic infrastructure is being ripped to shreds byglobalization.

So sadly, no, there are not a whole lot of reasons to be optimistic atthis point about a major economic turnaround.

The U.S. economy is going down the toilet and the coming collapse isgoing to be incredibly painful for all of us.

*** Bad News.... Microsoft Will Ruin It And Co-Opt It With UsGovernment - The Wall Street Journal

Microsoft Corp. racked up a whopping $8.5 billion phone bill to buySkype SARL even though there were no signs of other serious biddersfor the provider of free online video and voice chats, as the softwaregiant moved aggressively to ramp up its growth.

Microsoft made an unsolicited bid for the Internet company last monthand clinched its deal late Monday, nixing a planned Skype publicoffering and short-circuiting any talks with competitors such asGoogle Inc. and Facebook Inc.

Steve Ballmer, Microsoft's chief executive, defended the price in aninterview, saying the deal the biggest in his company's 36-yearhistory will let Microsoft "be more ambitious, do more things."

While Facebook, Google and Cisco Systems Inc. had shown interest inSkype, Microsoft was by far the most determined buyer, people familiarwith the matter said.

The price tag three times what Skype fetched 18 months ago is a signof just how hungry Microsoft is for growth opportunities especially inthe mobile-phone and Internet markets. Those missed opportunities areincreasingly worrisome to Microsoft investors as traditional profitengines, like its Windows software, are showing signs of slowing.

The Skype deal is a gamble by Mr. Ballmer that he can succeed wherethose that have gone before him have failed: using thephone-and-video-calling service to make money. Microsoft's ambitiousgoal is to integrate Skype into everything from its Xbox videogameconsole to its Office software suite for businesses.

Microsoft also hopes Skype can jump-start its effort to turn aroundits fortunes in the mobile-phone market, an area where it has laggedfar behind Apple Inc. and Google. Phones running Microsoft softwarewere just 7.5% of the smartphone market last quarter, according toComscore Inc.

The Skype purchase comes as the technology industry's momentum isincreasingly being fueled by consumers, with the explosive rise ofsocial network Facebook, now at more than 600 million global members,and devices such as Apple's iPad and iPhone reshaping the cellphoneand computer markets.

That has pushed many big tech companies that had largely relied onbusinesses for growth from Dell Inc. to Cisco to seek ways intoconsumer technologies.

Some of those moves haven't paid off, however. Cisco, for example,recently shut down the division that made its Flip video cameras, justtwo years after acquiring the business.

Whether Microsoft can make a Skype acquisition work especially at sucha rich price is a question mark. EBay Inc. bought Skype in 2005 foraround $3.1 billion but took a $1.4 billion charge for the transactionin 2007 after it failed to produce hoped-for synergies.

EBay decided to shed the business, and sold a 70% stake in Skype to agroup of investors led by private-equity firm Silver Lake Partnersabout 18 months ago. The deal valued all of Skype at a $2.75 billion.

Mr. Ballmer said Microsoft and Skype have far more in common thanSkype had with eBay since both companies are in the "communicationsbusiness." He said communications technologies have been "thebackbone" of Microsoft's growth in recent years and that Skype has"built a real business," with more than $860 million in 2010 revenue.

"I think our case for why to bring this together comes from a verydifferent place," he said.

Overall, Skype has more than 170 million active users and 207 billionminutes of voice and video conservations flowing through its service.But despite its widespread use, it has been slow to convert users intopaying customers and generate meaningful profits. It had a net lossof $7 million last year.

Skype lets people make free phone calls between computers or paypennies-a-minute to make overseas calls from traditional phones, andincreasingly it's being used in the form of an app on smartphones toavoid paying higher fees to wireless carriers for phone calls.

The acquisition comes three months after Microsoft struck an ambitiouspartnership with cellphone maker Nokia Corp. under which the Finnishcompany will rely on Microsoft software to power its smartphones.

Nokia, which is now heavily exposed to the decisions Microsoft makesregarding its mobile software, declined to say whether it had receiveda heads up on the deal. "Skype has been available to Nokia users fora number of years already, and we certainly understand the value ofthe asset that Microsoft has just acquired," a spokeswoman said. Shesaid the company will watch to see how Microsoft makes use of Skype.

Mr. Ballmer said Microsoft would continue to make Skype available forApple's gadgets and devices running Google software.

Tony Bates, Skype's chief executive, said Microsoft will help Skypeexpand its audience into the billions, from hundreds of millions ofusers. "I think our combined assets really accelerates and extendsthat," he said.

Skype filed for an IPO last August and had since held discussions withvarious companies about potential partnerships, said people familiarwith the matter. Microsoft was exploring partnerships with Skype, Mr.Ballmer said, but quickly concluded an acquisition made the mostsense. In early April, he made an unsolicited offer to Silver Lake,which owns 39% of the company.

Microsoft at that point was the only serious bidder, according topeople familiar with the matter, but the IPO alternative was credibleenough to help Skype drive a harder bargain.

"Microsoft put forth a very compelling offer," said Egon Durban, apartner at Silver Lake who negotiated the deal.

The $8.5 billion price tag for Skype surprised some industryexecutives and investors Tuesday, sending Microsoft's shares down 16cents to $25.67 on Nasdaq. Mr. Ballmer said the deal will add toMicrosoft earnings during the first year after it closes, though thatcalculation excludes certain items such as amortization. Microsoftexpects the deal to close by the end of 2011.

Meg Whitman, eBay's former CEO who faced criticism for acquiringSkype, said she was gratified to see the company bought for such ahigh number. She said Skype is at the center of a "sea change" in howpeople communicate with each other.

"Is Skype worth $8.5 billion? I don't know, but it depends on how bigthe platform grows," said Ms. Whitman. EBay, which initially lostmoney on the Skype acquisition, will end up with a profit of about$1.4 billion.

The U.S. Government is determined to put an end to online piracy. Inan attempt to give copyright holders and the authorities all the toolsrequired to disable access to so-called rogue sites, lawmakers willsoon introduce the PROTECT IP Act. Through domain seizures, ISPblockades, search engine censorship, and cutting funding of allegedlycopyright infringing websites, the bill takes Internet censorship tothe next level.

Internet censorship is a hot topic this year.

During the past 12 months the U.S. Government seized more than 100domain names it claimed were promoting copyright infringement. Butthis was just the beginning. The domain seizures pale in comparisonto a bill that's about to be introduced by U.S. lawmakers.

Dubbed the PROTECT IP Act, the bill will introduce a wide-scale ofcensorship tools authorities and copyright holders can use to quashwebsites they claim are facilitating copyright infringement. It isbasically a revamped and worsened version of the controversial COICAproposal which had to be resubmitted after its enaction failed lastyear.

The summary of the bill begins with a recital of the now-standardindustry claims about the financial harm caused by copyrightinfringement. Claims that interestingly enough were put in doubt bythe U.S. Government last year, but are still used to push anti-piracylegislation through globally.

"Copyright infringement and the sale of counterfeit goods are reportedto cost American creators and producers billions of dollars and toresult in hundreds of thousands in lost jobs annually. This pervasiveproblem has assumed an especially threatening form on the Internet,"the bill document reads.

It is further explained that the PROTECT IP Act is needed as anextension of the already controversial domain seizures. As reportedpreviously, it is now relatively easy for a seized website to continueoperating under a new non-US based domain name. With the new bill,however, the authorities and copyright holders have a broader scale oftools they can use.

"The Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theftof Intellectual Property Act ("PROTECT IP Act") authorizes the JusticeDepartment to file a civil action against the registrant or owner of adomain name that accesses a foreign Internet site, or theforeign-registered domain name itself, and to seek a preliminary orderfrom the court that the site is dedicated to infringing activities,"the document continues.

In case a domain is not registered or controlled by a U.S. company,the authorities can also order search engines to remove the websitefrom its search results, order ISPs to block the website, and orderad-networks and payment processors to stop providing services to thewebsite in question.

"If the court issues an order against the registrant, owner, or domainname, resulting from the DOJ-initiated suit, the Attorney General isauthorized to serve that order on specified U.S. based third-parties,including Internet service providers, payment processors, onlineadvertising network providers, and search engines. These thirdparties would then be required to take appropriate action to eitherprevent access to the Internet site, or cease doing business with theInternet site."

Although the above is already quite far-reaching, the bill also allowsfor private copyright holders to use some of the same tools as theGovernment. Without due process, copyright holders can obtain a courtorder to prevent payment providers and ad-networks from doing businesswith sites that allegedly facilitate copyright infringement. Unlikethe DOJ, copyright holders can not obtain orders to block sitesthrough ISPs or search engines.

The summary of the bill does not go into the constitutional issuesthat arise with several of the measures. However, it ensures that thelegislation is in the best interest of the public by protecting peoplefrom any website that "endangers the public health." The onlyprotection for accused websites is that they can "petition the courtto suspend or vacate the order," but lessons from the previous domainseizures show that this process can take up several months.

Britain's largest police force is using software that can map nearlyevery move suspects and their associates make in the digital world,prompting an outcry from civil liberties groups.

The Metropolitan police has bought Geotime, a security programme usedby the US military, which shows an individual's movements andcommunications with other people on a three-dimensional graphic. Itcan be used to collate information gathered from social networkingsites, satellite navigation equipment, mobile phones, financialtransactions and IP network logs.

Police have confirmed its purchase and declined to rule out its use ininvestigating public order disturbances.

Campaigners and lawyers have expressed concern at how the softwarecould be used to monitor innocent parties such as protesters in breachof data protection legislation. Alex Hanff, the campaigns manager atPrivacy International, called on the police to explain who will decidehow this software will be used in future.

"Once millions and millions of pieces of microdata are aggregated, youend up with this very high-resolution picture of somebody, and this iseffectively what they are doing here.

"We shouldn't be tracked and traced and have pictures built by our owngovernment and police for the benefit of commercial gain," he said.

Sarah McSherry, a partner at Christian Khan Solicitors, whichrepresents several protesters in cases against the Metropolitanpolice, said: "We have already seen the utilisation of a number oftactics which infringe the right to peaceful protest, privacy andfreedom of expression, assembly and movement. All of these have achilling effect on participation in peaceful protest. This latesttool could also be used in a wholly invasive way and could fly in theface of the role of the police to facilitate rather than impede theactivities of democratic protesters."

Hugh Tomlinson QC, a specialist in privacy, said a public body such asthe police must be able to justify the lawfulness of how it uses theinformation it collects and retains. "Storing data because it'spotentially interesting or potentially useful is not good enough.There has got to be some specific justification," he said.

According to Geotime's website, the programme displays data from avariety of sources, allowing the user to navigate the data with atimeline and animated display. The website claims it can also throwup previously unseen connections between individuals. "Links betweenentities can represent communications, relationships, transactions,message logs, etc and are visualised over time to reveal temporalpatterns and behaviours," it reads.

The software was displayed in Britain earlier this month at thedefence industry Counter Terror exhibition in Olympia, west London.Curtis Garton, product management director for Oculus, the companythat markets the programme, said the Metropolitan police was the onlyUK police force to have purchased the software. "[There are] a fewcountries that we don't sell to, but in terms of commercial salespretty much anybody can buy," he said. The issue of data retentionand how it is used has become a major political and judicial issue.The European justice commissioner, Viviane Reding, said in March thatdata protection rules also applied to data retention. "Individualsmust be informed about which data is collected and for what purposes,"she said. "To be effective, data protection rights need to actuallybe enforced."

The Guardian disclosed last week that an 86-year-old man had beengranted permission to take legal action against police chiefs who kepta detailed record of his political activities on a clandestinedatabase.

John Catt, who has no criminal record, is bringing the high courtaction against a secretive police unit that systematically logged hispresence at more than 55 peace and human rights protests over afour-year period.

Some academics have praised the software as a positive move for thepolice in their fight against terrorist groups and organised crime.

Professor Anthony Glees, director of the University of Buckingham'sCentre for Security and Intelligence Studies, said he was aware oftracking software such as Geotime, the use of which he described as"absolutely right".

"There are these dangerous people out there and we need to stay aheadof the game in order to deal with the threat that they pose," he said."My feeling is: if it can be done, and if its purpose is theprotection of the ordinary citizen that wants to go about their lawfulbusiness ... then it's absolutely fine."

A spokesman for the Met confirmed that Geotime had been paid for, andsaid several possible uses for it were being assessed, including as atool in "telephone investigations".

He declined to clarify what a telephone investigation might be or howmuch the software cost. Neither could he comment on whether thesoftware might be used during investigations into public orderoffences in the future.

"We are in the process of evaluating the Geotime software to explorehow it could possibly be used to assist us in understanding patternsin data relating to both space and time. A decision has yet to bemade as to whether we will adopt the technology [permanently]. Wehave used dummy data to look at how the software works and haveexplored how we could use it to examine police vehicle movements,crime patterns and telephone investigations," he wrote in an email.

Despite last week's "termination" of America's b te noire, Osama binLaden, the reputed "emir" and old "new Hitler" of the Afghan-Arabdatabase of disposable Western intelligence assets known as al-Qaeda,Secrecy News reports an uptick in domestic spying.

Never mind that the administration is engaged in an unprecedented waron whistleblowers, or is systematically targeting antiwar andsolidarity activists with trumped-up charges connected to the"material support of terrorism," as last Fall's multi-state raids onanarchists and socialists in Chicago and Minneapolis attest.

In order to do their best to "keep us safe," Team Obama is busilybuilding upon the criminal legacy bequeathed to the administration bythe Bush regime and even asserts the right to assassinate Americancitizens "without a whiff of due process," as Salon's Glenn Greenwaldpoints out.

According to a new Justice Department report submitted to Congress welearn that "during calendar year 2010, the Government made 1,579applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court(hereinafter 'FISC') for authority to conduct electronic surveillanceand/or physical searches" on what U.S. security agencies allege are"for foreign intelligence purposes."

The April 29 missive, released under the Freedom of Information Act,documents the persistence of our internal security apparat's targetingof domestic political opponents, under color of rooting out"terrorists."

As I have pointed out many times, national security letters areonerous lettres de cachet, secretive administrative subpoenas withbuilt-in gag orders used by the Bureau to seize records fromthird-parties such as banks, libraries and telecommunicationsproviders without any judicial process whatsoever, not to mention theexpenditure of scarce tax dollars to spy on the American people.

"Money for Nothing..."

With U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder's February announcement thatthe Department of Justice will seek $28.2 billion from Congress inFiscal Year 2012, a 1.7% increase, the FBI is slated to reap an $8.1billion windfall.

We're told that the "administration supports critical nationalsecurity programs within the department, including the FBI and theNational Security Division (NSD)."

"The requested national security resources include $122.5 million inprogram increases for the FBI," including "$48.9 million for the FBIto expand national security related surveillance and enhance its DataIntegration and Visualization System, as well as "$18.6 million forthe FBI's Computer Intrusion Initiative to increase coverage indetecting cyber intrusions."

Rather ironic, considering that ThreatPost reported last month that aU.S. Department of Justice audit found that the FBI's ability to"investigate cyber intrusions" was less than adequate. The reportdisclosed that "fully 36% [of field agents] were found to beill-equipped."

To make matters worse, "FBI field offices do not have sufficientanalytical and forensic capabilities to support large scaleinvestigations, the audit revealed." All the more reason then toshower even more money on the Bureau!

And with the FBI demanding new authority to peer into our lives, on-and offline, the FY 2012 budget would "address the growingtechnological gap between law enforcement's electronic surveillancecapabilities and the number and variety of communications devicesavailable to the public, $17.0 million in program increases are beingrequested to bolster the department's electronic surveillancecapabilities."

One sure sign that things haven't changed under Obama is the FBI'squest for additional funds for what it is now calling it's DataIntegration and Visualization System (DIVS). According to Aprilcongressional testimony by FBI Director Robert Mueller, DIVS will"prioritize and integrate disparate datasets across the Bureau."

Another in a long line of taxpayer-funded boondoggles, it appears thatDIVS is the latest iteration of various failed "case management" and"data integration" programs stood up by the Bureau.

As I reported last year, previous failed efforts by the FBI haveincluded the Bureau's Virtual Case File (VCF) project. Overseen bythe spooky Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), VCFcost taxpayers some $170 million dollars before it crashed and burnedin 2006.

And when defense and security giant Lockheed Martin took over the casemanagement brief, VCF, now rechristened Sentinel, also enjoyed asimilarly expensive and waste-filled fate. A 2009 report by theDepartment of Justice's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) foundthat despite some $450 million dollars showered on Lockheed Martin andassorted subcontractors, the Sentinel system "encountered significantchallenges."

According to a notice quietly posted in August in the FederalRegister, "DIVS contains replications and extractions of informationmaintained by the FBI in other databases. This information isreplicated or extracted into DIVS in order to provide an enhanced andintegrated view of that information."

Wait a minute! Isn't that what VCF and Sentinel were supposed to do?We're told that the "purpose of DIVS is to strengthen and improve themethods by which the FBI searches for and analyzes information insupport of its multifaceted mission responsibilities to protect thenation against terrorism and espionage and investigate criminalmatters."

(Dirty) Business as Usual

While the FBI and the Justice Department have failed to prosecutecorporate criminals responsible for the greatest theft and upwardtransfer of wealth in history, not to mention the virtualget-out-of-jail-free cards handed out to top executives of thedrug-money laundering Wachovia Bank, they're rather adept at tramplingthe rights of the American people.

As the San Francisco Bay Guardian recently reported, while corporatelawbreakers get a free pass, "San Francisco cops assigned to the FBI'sterrorism task force can ignore local police orders and Californiaprivacy laws to spy on people without any evidence of a crime."

According to a Memorandum of Understanding obtained by the ACLU, "iteffectively puts local officers under the control of the FBI,"investigative journalist Sarah Phelan disclosed.

Civil rights attorney Veena Dubal told the Bay Guardian that during"the waning months of the Bush administration" the FBI "changed itspolicies to allow federal authorities to collect intelligence on aperson even if the subject is not suspected of a crime. The FBI isnow allowed to spy on Americans who have done nothing wrong--and whomay be engaged in activities protected by the First Amendment."

"It's the latest sign of a dangerous trend: San Francisco cops areworking closely with the feds, often in ways that run counter to citypolicy," Phelan writes. "And it raises a far-reaching question: Witha district attorney who used to be police chief, a civilian commissionthat isn't getting a straight story from the cops, and a climate ofsecrecy over San Francisco's intimate relations with outside agencies,who is watching the cops?"

Apparently, no one; and in such a repressive climate the federalgovernment has encouraged the FBI to target anyone deemed a threat tothe new corporate order.

Earlier this year, an Electronic Frontier Foundation report revealedthat the Bureau continues to systematically violate the constitutionalguarantees of American citizens and legal residents, and does so withcomplete impunity.

As I wrote at the time, this was rather ironic considering the freepasses handed out by U.S. securocrats to actual terrorists who killedthousands of Americans on 9/11, as both WikiLeaks and FBIwhistleblower Sibel Edmonds disclosed.

According to EFF, more than 2,500 documents obtained under the Freedomof Information Act revealed that:

* From 2001 to 2008, the FBI reported to the IOB approximately 800violations of laws, Executive Orders, or other regulations governingintelligence investigations, although this number likely significantlyunder-represents the number of violations that actually occurred. * From 2001 to 2008, the FBI investigated, at minimum, 7000 potentialviolations of laws, Executive Orders, or other regulations governingintelligence investigations. * Based on the proportion of violations reported to the IOB and the FBI's own statements regarding the number of NSL violations that occurred,the actual number of violations that may have occurred from 2001 to 2008 could approach 40,000 possible violations of law, Executive Order, or other regulations governing intelligence investigations. (Electronic Frontier Foundation, Patterns of Misconduct: FBI Intelligence Violations from 2001-2008, January 30, 2011)

But FBI lawbreaking didn't stop there. Citing internal documents, EFFrevealed that the Bureau also "engaged in a number of flagrant legalviolations" that included, "submitting false or inaccuratedeclarations to courts," "using improper evidence to obtain federalgrand jury subpoenas" and "accessing password protected documentswithout a warrant."

And just last week the civil liberties' watchdogs reported that "theU.S. District Court for the Central District of California hasrevealed the FBI lied to the court about the existence of recordsrequested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), taking theposition that FOIA allows it to withhold information from the courtwhenever it thinks this is in the interest of national security."

The court sharply disagreed and asserted that "the Government cannot,under any circumstance, affirmatively mislead the Court."

The Court held, following settled case law that goes all the way backto Marbury v. Madison (1803) that "Numerous statutes, rules, andcases reflect the understanding that the Judiciary cannot carry outits essential function if lawyers, parties, or witnesses obscure thefacts."

Skewering the FBI, U.S. District Judge Cormac J. Carney wrote thatwhile "The Government contends that the FOIA permits it to provide theCourt with the same misinformation it provided to Plaintiffs regardingthe existence of other responsive information or else the Governmentwould compromise national security ... that argument isindefensible."

Nevertheless, that court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stillheld that despite the Bureau's obvious attempt to bamboozle thefederal judiciary, thus subverting the separation of powers amongstthe three co-equal branches of government as stipulated in the U.S.Constitution (Article III), "disclosing the number and nature of thedocuments the Government possesses could reasonably be expected tocompromise national security." (see: Islamic Shura Council of S.California v. FBI.)

In other words, while the Bureau was chastised for withholdingrelevant documents from the court that might demonstrate their illegalsurveillance of organizations and individuals who have never beenindicted, or even charged, with so-called "terrorism offenses," the"national security" card trumps everything.

Electronic Surveillance

Late last month, EFF staff attorney Jennifer Lynch reported the grouphad "recently received documents from the FBI that reveal detailsabout the depth of the agency's electronic surveillance capabilitiesand call into question the FBI's controversial effort to push Congressto expand the Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act (CALEA)for greater access to communications data."

The documents were obtained under a FOIA request by EFF after a 2007report published by Wired disclosed that the FBI had deployed "secretspyware" to track domestic targets.

According to Wired, "FBI agent Norman Sanders describes the softwareas a 'computer and internet protocol address verifier,' or CIPAV."

In a follow-up piece, investigative journalist Ryan Singel revealedthat the FBI "has quietly built a sophisticated, point-and-clicksurveillance system that performs instant wiretaps on almost anycommunications device."

That surveillance system known as DCSNet, or Digital Collection SystemNetwork, formerly known as Carnivore, "connects FBI wiretapping roomsto switches controlled by traditional land-line operators,internet-telephony providers and cellular companies," Wired reported.

"It is far more intricately woven into the nation's telecominfrastructure than observers suspected," Singel wrote at the time, apoint underscored a year later when whistleblower Babak Pasdar blewthe lid off the close relations amongst America's telecoms and theBureau's illegal surveillance programs.

As Antifascist Calling reported at the time, a telecom carrier Pasdarworked for as a security consultant, subsequently named as Verizon byThe Washington Post, said the company maintained a high-speed DS-3digital line that allowed the Bureau and other security agencies"unfettered" access to the carrier's wireless network, includingbilling records and customer data "transmitted wirelessly."

While Verizon denied the report that the FBI has open access to itsnetwork, their mendacious claims were demolished when thesecrecy-shredding web site Cryptome published the firm's "LawEnforcement Legal Compliance Guide" in 2010.

Amongst the "helpful hints" provided to law enforcement by thecarrier, Verizon urges state spies to "be specific."

"Do not include wording such as 'any and all records'", we read. "Thecourts have traditionally ruled that this wording is considered overlybroad and burdensome. Request only what is required." On and on itgoes...

According to documents obtained by EFF, the technologies discussed byBureau snoops, when installed on a target's computer, allows the FBIto collect the following:

According to initial reporting by Wired, the FBI may have infiltratedthe malicious program onto a target's computer by "pointing to codethat would install the spyware by exploiting a vulnerability in theuser's browser."

Lynch comments that "although the documents discuss some problems withinstalling the tool in some cases, other documents note that theagency's Crypto Unit only needs 24-48 hours to prepare deployment."

Once the tool is installed, Bureau snoops aver "it stay[s] persistenton the compromised computer and ... every time the computer connectsto the Internet, [FBI] will capture the information associated withthe PRTT [Pen Register/Trap & Trace Order]."

The privacy watchdogs write that the Bureau "has been using the toolin domestic criminal investigations as well as in FISA cases, and theFISA Court appears to have questioned the propriety of the tool."

This is particularly relevant, and troubling, considering that the FBIand other secret state agencies such as the CIA and NSA alreadypossess formidable surveillance tools in their arsenals and thatprivate security outfits such as HBGary and Palantir--as well ashundreds of other firms--are busily concocting ever-more intrusivespyware for their state and private partners, as the massivedisclosure of internal HBGary emails and documents by thecyber-guerrilla group Anonymous revealed.

With all the hot air from Washington surrounding claims by the FBI andother secret state satrapies that they'll "go dark" unless Congressgrants them authority to build secret backdoors into America'scommunications networks, EFF revealed that documents "show the FBIalready has numerous tools available to surveil suspects directly,rather than through each of their communications service providers."

"One heavily redacted email notes that the FBI has other tools that'provide the functionality of the CIPAV [text redacted] as well asprovide other useful info that could help further the case'."

When President Obama talked about a transparent administration duringthe run up to the 2008 election most Americans assumed he was talkingabout openness in government dealings. Obviously, this is not thecase, as evidenced by the administration's handling of the universalhealth care legislation which was passed without a single Americanhaving had a chance to read it for 72 hours before a vote as thePresident promised would be the case with all legislation, refusal torelease photographic evidence of the Osama Bin Laden raid, thePresident's own birth certificate which has taken two years to be madepublic, and the many secret meetings held with Congressional membersbehind closed doors.

It should be clear by now that Big Government's domestic surveillancepolicies under Presidents Bill Clinton and George Bush are beingfurthered expanded by Mr. Obama.

Transparency, it seems, had nothing to do with making government morevisible. It did, however, have everything to do with making your likemore transparent.

Before we itemize the many ways in which you're being watch, surveyed,monitored and aggregated, this latest report by Alex Thomas of TheIntel Hub reiterates, yet again, that digital surveillancecapabilities are not just isolated to intelligence agencies:

A lawsuit filed on Tuesday alleges that Aaron's, a huge furniture rentto buy company, used software and a special device on their computersthat enabled them to spy on PC renters.

According to the lawsuit, the company is able to track keystrokes andsnap webcam pictures in the home of their customers.

Brian and Crystal Byrd, the couple who filed the lawsuit, claim thatthey were never told about these intrusive spying measures.

While computer privacy experts agree that Aaron's has the right toinstall devices that enable them to shut down the computers remotely,customers must be told that they are being monitored.

The couple only found out about the spying after an Aaron's employeeshowed them a picture of Brian Byrd that was taken remotely while theByrds were in their home.

"After they showed us the picture, I, of course, felt violated,"Crystal Byrd said in an interview Monday. "There are many times I satin front of that computer with barely nothing on. So I didn't know ifthey had taken lots of pictures of us or what," reported the WyomingTribune.

Brian Byrd also reported that he thinks the picture was shown to himin order to intimidate him into an easy repossession. Source: TheIntel Hub

While we often hear protests from privacy advocates about governmentintrusion into the lives of Americans, what many fail to understand isthat it's not just the government. Private businesses like Aaron's,as well as large corporate conglomerates, are themselves engaging inthe surveillance of Americans with the development of products andservices specifically for this purpose and often without the consentof their customers, or, through terms of services agreements thatinclude dozens of pages of unintelligible fine print.

As modern technology continues to advance at breakneck speeds, just asthe merger of the corporations and the state are occurring withinpolitical circles, so to are they becoming more prevalent in theintelligence sphere.

Fellow Americans, everything you do is being monitored.

With respect to the government, it's not by choice. However, whendealing with private businesses, we have readily accepted our own fateby accepting into our lives the very technologies that make it allpossible.

* What You Do Online Is No Secret: As you sit in the perceived privacyof your own home reading this article, a log of your surfing habitsand preferred reading or video viewing subjects is being created.Your IP address, that unique identifier the points specifically to thebroadband line connected to your home modem, is time stamped withevery web site you visit. Everything you watch at video web sites,everything you download online, and even your search queries arelogged. You don't even have to have an account with a major onlineservice provider your IP is sufficient but that user account youcreate is used to further improve your personal profile andcharacteristics.

* We can see you. We can hear you. Not only are your actions logged,but if you were deemed a person of interest for whatever reason, thatlittle camera staring back at you on top of your monitor or thatmicrophone built directly into your PC can be flipped on for remotesurveillance at any time. While Aaron's furniture or the local schooldistrict may need to install special software to remotely view whatyou're doing in your bedroom, public sector intelligence groupsoperating on equipment that is technologically advanced compared tothe consumer products of today is perfectly capable of entering your'secure' home network and turning on those video and audio features and you'd have absolutely no clue it's going on.

* Your cell phone is a mobile monitoring device. Much like yourcomputer, all modern day cell phones come with cameras. And they allhave a microphone. It is no secret that law enforcement agencies havethe ability to easily tap these devices and listen and watch anythingthat's going on. This capability is essentially hard-wired right intothe phone. In fact, it has been reported that even if your cell phoneis turned completely off, the microphone can still be remotelyactivated. The only known solution is to remove the battery if youwant to ensure complete privacy. Sounds pretty far-fetched doesn'tit? Up until two weeks, so did the notion that Apple and Androidphones could track and log everywhere you go. We now know that thisis exactly what's happening, and literally, every movement you make istracked within inches of your location. A log of everywhere you havebeen has been logged if your cell phone was in your pocket.

* Phone Conversation and Email Analysis. If you haven't guess yet,phones can be dangerous to your personal privacy. In the 1990's, thefew alternative media web sites on the internet often discussed alittle know operation in Europe called Echelon. It was hard core tinfoil conspiracy type stuff. You know, the kind where intelligenceagencies were plugged into the entire phone, fax and email grids andhad computers analyzing conversations in multiple languages lookingfor keywords and keyword strings. If you said a specific word, yourconversation was immediately red-flagged and distributed toappropriate intel desks. As sci-fi as this may sound, it turns outthat the 'conspiracy theorists' were 100% correct about Echelon. Itsexistence has been confirmed by the US government. Of course, no suchsystem could possibly exist here domestically.

* Your pictures are not private. When you snap those photos of thekids in the front yard and subsequently post those pictures on yourfavorite social network, guess what? That's right, an inquiringviewer on your social networking account can track exactly where thatpicture was taken. Remember that location logging thing with yourcell phone? It turns out that every single picture you take with mostnewer model cell phones will be tagged with specific GPS coordinates.When you upload that picture anywhere online, that locationinformation becomes publicly available. So anyone who wants to knowcan now track down exactly where it is your kids were when the picturewas taken, or, where exactly you were if you happened to engage in anactivity that may be deemed illegal.

* The social network. For many, it's fun to spend every waking hourupdating the rest of the world on what we're doing. We publish ourthoughts. We upload our pictures. We even click a like button at theend of articles like this one to let people know what we're into andwhat they should be reading. As social networking becomes bigger,connecting hundreds of millions of people across the world, so to doesthe profiling of members of these networks. Have you agreed with whata certain person has said in a recent post? If they're aperson-of-interest for whatever reason, then guess what? You've justbecome one too. Did your friend recently take a picture of you at aparty getting rowdy? Once that hits the social network, facialrecognition technology will identify you and publish your name for allthe world to see, including current or future employers. It's asocial network, and its purpose is to learn everything about you.Perhaps this is why key U.S. intelligence agencies made no effort tohide their $5 billion investment in the largest network in the worldrecently. Social networking is a critical tool in the struggle tocategorize every person on earth.

* Toll tags and license plates. Even if you've given up the cellphone and prefer to go without for privacy reasons, when you drivearound town you may have noticed those little intersection cameras at least four of them on every major (or more regularly now, minor)intersection. While most of them may not be tied to the computerprocessing systems yet, some, and especially those in sensitive areasand toll booths can automatically read your license plate. Like yourcell phone, your position can be logged on a regular basis with eitheryour toll tag or simply, your license plate. Impossible? Not really.

Especially when you consider that the information required to trackyour personal movements are nothing but a few data bytes. All anyonereally needs to keep extensive records is a bigger hard drive.

* We know your underwear size. Admittedly, we sometimes have a hardtime remembering what size pants or shirts we need to purchase. Butwhile our memory may be failing, private data aggregators have plentyof it, and the processing power to boot. Everything you have everbought with a credit card or membership club card is sent off forprocessing and aggregation to centralized data centers. While you mayuse a Visa card at one store, a Mastercard at another, and pay cashwith a grocery membership card somewhere else, it's as easy as findingyour name and cross referencing that on your cards and your entireshopping profile can be created. The purpose, we're told, is tobetter improve our shopping experience and provide market data tocompanies so that they can improve their advertising. We can onlyguess at who else has access to this information, which happens to bevery easily accessible and widely available for a small fee.

* Radio Frequency Identification. Say you've decided to scrap cellphones, internet surfing and electronic payment or membership cards.And, you choose to walk everywhere you go. Not a problem forenterprising surveillance technologists. Large retail distributorshave already begun implementing RFID technologies into every majorproduct on store shelves. For now, most of the RFID tracking islimited to transportation and inventory control and is designed totrack products on the pallet level. Tracking capabilities areimproving, however, and are quickly being implemented on theindividual product level. That means when you buy a soda at yourlocal grocery store, an RFID monitoring station will be capable oftracking that soda across the entire city, with the goal eventuallybeing whether or not you put that aluminum can in a trashcan or arecycle bin once you were finished drinking it. One day, you may beissued a ticket by a law enforcement computer autmatically for failingto dispose of your trash properly. Again, it's simply an issue ofhard drive space and processing power and technology will soon getover that hurdle. All electronics, clothing, food packaging, and justabout everything else will soon contain a passive RFID chip.

* Ripping Data Off Your Private, Secure, chip-enhanced personalidentification cards. Passports, driver's licenses, credit cards,cell phones they all store data. Personal data like bankinginformation, birth date, social security numbers, pictures, phonebooks basically everything you've ever wanted to keep private. Asstorage technology further integrates into our daily lives, andeverything from our passports to our health insurance cards contains adigital chip that stores our private information, it will become mucheasier to rip that data from your purse or wallet without evertouching you. A recent report indicated that local law enforcementofficials now have devices that, when you're pulled over, can remotelypull all of the data on your cell phone. This demonstrates how simpleit is for anyone, be it law enforcement or criminals, to gain accessto everything about you including you personal travel habits.

* Eye in the sky. We've previously reported about domestic droneprograms in Houston and Miami. Local and state law enforcementagencies are increasingly adding Federal and military technologies totheir surveillance arsenals. Drones have the capability of flyingquietly and at high altitude, while monitoring multiple targetssimultaneously. It's been reported that domestic drones can not onlymonitor in the visible light spectrum, but night vision and infrared.

That means they can 'see' what you're doing in your home behind closeddoors. Incidentally, there have been reports of roaming groundpatrols with similar infrared technology, capable of seeing rightthrough your walls. This is not science fiction this is realityright now. Combine this with real-time spy agency satellites andinterested parties have the ability to see and hear you, even whenyou're locked indoors with computers and cell phones disabled.

* Security cameras. We've already discussed traffic cams. Butcameras are not limited to just the government. Residences, retailersand even day cares are now interconnecting camera security systemswith online web browsing. And, as we pointed out earlier, these areeasily subject to unauthorized access. Certain cities in the US arenow allowing residents to register their personal or business camerasystems with the city to allow for local police monitoring. Thegovernment doesn't need to push the technology on us. The peoplewillingly accept the technology en masse in exchange for a sense ofbeing more secure.